National

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ comes to an end

Burden on gay, lesbian service members lifted Tuesday

Published

14 years ago

September 15, 2011

An estimated 2 million U.S. service members were trained on gay-related issues in the run-up to next Tuesday’s lifting of the military’s gay ban. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

As gay and lesbian troops await the end of the 18-year-old ban on openly gay service members on Tuesday, observers say the change will have significant impact beyond the military.

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will finally be lifted from the books thanks to the certification of repeal that President Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen sent to Congress on July 22. In accordance with the repeal law that President Obama signed in December, certification started a 60-day timeclock for the end of the ban on Sept. 20.

Aaron Belkin, author of “How We Won,” a book on the lessons learned for progressive causes resulting from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, said the end of the military’s gay ban represents the end of what he called the “political paranoia” that led to the institution of the law in 1993.

“Just abstracting away from the question of LGBT rights that’s a danger to every American citizen,” Belkin said. “Sept. 20 is about the cultural change for the military and the political change for gay and lesbian troops … but I would say, even more importantly, it’s a moment when truth and fairness trumped paranoia, and that’s just critical.”

Jeff Krehely, director of the LGBT research and communications project at the Center for American Progress, said allowing open service will be significant for many Americans.

“‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal is huge and tremendous, but I think there are much larger implications for society because a lot of people really respect the military,” Krehely said.

Observers agree the process that led to the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will have a lasting impact as well.

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the training in which service members have been participating will have significant influence on the perspective with which troops — and the American public at large — view gay and lesbian people.

“They really took the time to train and educate the force on the various assets of this policy and hypotheticals,” Nicholson said. “It was an hour of instruction on gays and lesbians, on gay families, on gay partners and it was a really a normalization routine. It was really exposed to millions of America’s most conservative youth to the normality of gays and lesbians.”

Among the situations that the training addressed, Nicholson said, were gay troops holding hands, going on dates or participating in military events with their partners. Nearly 2 million service members received the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” training before certification took place on July 22, according to the Pentagon.

Workplace discrimination against LGBT people could be an issue that gains new focus after “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. No federal law exists to protect LGBT workers against discrimination. Firing someone for being gay is legal in 29 states and firing someone for being transgender is legal in 35 states.

Krehely said open service could generate support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination against LGBT workers in most situations in the public and private workforce, or encourage other employers to add protections for LGBT workers.

“The military is probably one of the biggest and most visible workplaces in our country,” Krehely said. “I think Sept. 20 is a clear indication that this discrimination should not be there any longer, and that we need to move forward on ENDA, and educate people about the broader workplace issues that we’re up against.”

Despite the potential for long-term impact, advocates say the change resulting in the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” won’t be immediately apparent and any impact of any lifting the gay ban will be more drawn out.

Krehely said the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” next week won’t mean the “world changes necessarily” on Tuesday.

“I think that it’s just people who want to serve their country will want to do that without living in fear,” Krehely said. “That’s the biggest change. It may not be visible, but it’s really important to those people and it’s really important to the military itself.”

Nicholson predicted Tuesday will be a “non-event” and said many gay service members will choose not to come out even though they won’t be in danger of dismissal now that the military’s gay ban is off the books.

“I think you’ll see a good number of them who decide not to come out,” Nicholson said. “I think the post-repeal military is going to resemble any conservative American workplace where individuals judge their willingness and their comfort level in coming out.”

According to the most recent findings from the Williams Institute at the University of California in Los Angeles, an estimated 48,500 lesbians, gay men and bisexuals serve on active duty or in the ready reserve in the U.S. military, while an additional 22,000 are in standby and retired reserve forces. These 70,500 service members make up 2.2 percent of the total force.

But what will happen to those service members who choose to be public about their sexual orientation? Will service members patronize their local gay bars while in uniform? Will Pride parades include contingents of openly gay troops?

Some gay troops have already started brandishing their military credentials during Pride celebrations. In July, about 200 active-duty troops and veterans marched in San Diego’s Pride parade. They weren’t wearing uniforms, but T-shirts indicating their branch of service. The event was the first time a military contingent participated in a Pride celebration in the United States.

Nicholson said that the standards that apply to straight service members with regard to uniforms will also apply to gay troops — so wearing the uniform may not be appropriate in some circumstances.

“Unless it’s some unusual circumstances, service members don’t wear their uniforms out to the bar,” Nicholson said. “I can pretty much guarantee that violations of long-standing and well-understood regulations like that for the sake of publicity is going to be frowned upon by gay troops because the community consensus is they want to blend in like everyone else and not have any special treatment.”

Nonetheless, gay troops will undoubtedly be visible in the post-repeal world. Belkin said the higher visibility of gay troops — and their relationships — following the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will add to the political pressure to advance the fight for same-sex marriage.

“We’re going to see gay and lesbian service members coming back from the Middle East and talking about the importance of marriage equality, and, very tragically, we’re going to see gay and lesbian service members fall in the battlefield and their partners, husbands and wives will not be dealt any benefits their straight counterparts have,” Belkin said. “That is going to illustrate for the public in a much more vivid way the stakes of the marriage debate.”

What’s the next frontier for those who worked to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?” Securing benefits for gay and lesbian troops is the next step advocates plan to take after the gay ban is lifted from the books.

The Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage, prevents the military from offering benefits to gay troops, such as health care benefits. But other benefits related to housing and legal services could be changed administratively.

Krehely said benefits for gay troops will be among the issues advocacy groups will be pushing for in the post-repeal world.

“I think that there are still some implementation issues that need to be worked out in terms of benefits and housing, and I think that’s something advocacy organizations and research groups are going to keep trying to make some progress on,” Krehely said.

Up Next

SSA policy change aids trans workers

Don't Miss

Path clearer for Baldwin to claim Democratic banner

FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM

Federal Government

RFK Jr.’s HHS report pushes therapy, not medical interventions, for trans youth

‘Discredited junk science’ — GLAAD

Published

2 hours ago

May 1, 2025

Christopher Kane

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A 409-page report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenges the ethics of medical interventions for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, the treatments that are often collectively called gender-affirming care, instead advocating for psychotherapy alone.

The document comes in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order barring the federal government from supporting gender transitions for anyone younger than 19.

“Our duty is to protect our nation’s children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,” National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement. “We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”

While the report does not constitute clinical guidance, its findings nevertheless conflict with not just the recommendations of LGBTQ advocacy groups but also those issued by organizations with relevant expertise in science and medicine.

The American Medical Association, for instance, notes that “empirical evidence has demonstrated that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression.”

Gender-affirming care for transgender youth under standards widely used in the U.S. includes supportive talk therapy along with — in some but not all cases — puberty blockers or hormone treatment.

“The suggestion that someone’s authentic self and who they are can be ‘changed’ is discredited junk science,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement. “This so-called guidance is grossly misleading and in direct contrast to the recommendation of every leading health authority in the world. This report amounts to nothing more than forcing the same discredited idea of conversion therapy that ripped families apart and harmed gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people for decades.”

GLAAD further notes that the “government has not released the names of those involved in consulting or authoring this report.”

Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC, said, “For decades, every major medical association–including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics–have affirmed that medical care is the only safe and effective treatment for transgender youth experiencing gender dysphoria.

“This report is simply promoting conversion therapy by a different name – and the American people know better. We know that conversion therapy isn’t actually therapy – it isolates and harms kids, scapegoats parents, and divides families through blame and rejection. These tactics have been used against gay kids for decades, and now the same people want to use them against transgender youth and their families.

“The end result here will be a devastating denial of essential health care for transgender youth, replaced by a dangerous practice that every major U.S. medical and mental health association agree promotes anxiety, depression, and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice, and no amount of pressure can force someone to change who they are. We also know that 98% of people who receive transition-related health care continue to receive that health care throughout their lifetime. Trans health care is health care.”

“Today’s report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda. The claims in today’s report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can’t change.”

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice—it’s rooted in biology and genetics,” Minter said. “No amount or talk or pressure will change that.”

Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown released a statement: “Trans people are who we are. We’re born this way. And we deserve to live our best lives and have a fair shot and equal opportunity at living a good life.

“This report misrepresents the science that has led all mainstream American medical and mental health professionals to declare healthcare for transgender youth to be best practice and instead follows a script predetermined not by experts but by Sec. Kennedy and anti-equality politicians.”

The White House

Trump nominates Mike Waltz to become next UN ambassador

Former Fla. congressman had been national security advisor

Published

3 hours ago

May 1, 2025

Michael K. Lavers

U.N. headquarters in New York (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he will nominate Mike Waltz to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N.

Waltz, a former Florida congressman, had been the national security advisor.

Trump announced the nomination amid reports that Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, were going to leave the administration after Waltz in March added a journalist to a Signal chat in which he, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other officials discussed plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.

“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations,” said Trump in a Truth Social post that announced Waltz’s nomination. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role.”

Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as interim national security advisor, “while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department.”

“Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to make America, and the world, safe again,” said Trump.

Trump shortly after his election nominated U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Trump in March withdrew her nomination in order to ensure Republicans maintained their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

U.S. Federal Courts

Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy

Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Published

3 days ago

April 28, 2025

Michael K. Lavers

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.

The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”

Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.

“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.

Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.

The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.

Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”

Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.

“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”

“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.

Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.

Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.

The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.

Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.

A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.